Ganesh
Ganesh
Thanks for the rapid/comprehensive reply 👍 I'll take a look at `has_` (it's mostly for diagnostics, to confirm what msg/fields was created/sent)
I'm not finding the `has_`, probably looking in the wrong place... Is it in the published 'api' for protobuf? Can you point me? I suppose it is something like: ```...
> In case you are using `proto3`, you may want to explicitly declare your fields as `optional` Thanks; I expect that is where I missed them; I have the minimal...
As long as you're here, in other thread you say: `"noImplicitOverride": true,` is supported. Can you say how to get the needed `override` into the generated .ts ? (that is:...
Thanks again! [I cannot imagine why that is not the default]
Comment: using 'optional' to generate `has_` "works"; by decorating the field as a `one-of`. A lot of extra clutter in the code... but perhaps I'll just define the has_fieldName getter...
@thesayyn : when there are *other* 'type' problems, tsc includes a complaint about a `#one_of_decls` mismatch. Happily, when the other type declarations are fixed, tsc says "OH... Ok, looks like...
To be clear: I added my own `has_` which check `length>0` But is a lie... because sending NO array is different that sending a zero-length array. And there is currently...
Yes, I have inserted the "hadField" methods where necessary/useful
While we're in there, this (especially "none" to mark field 0) may be problematic: ``` message usage { oneof quant { bool all = 1; bool some = 2; bool...